Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

GOCE Data Processing: The Spherical Cap Regularization Approach

  • Published:
Studia Geophysica et Geodaetica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Due to the sun-synchronous orbit of the satellite gravity gradiometry mission GOCE, the measurements will not be globally available. As a consequence, using a set of base functions with global support such as spherical harmonics, the matrix of normal equations tends to be ill-conditioned, leading to weakly determined low-order spherical harmonic coefficients. The corresponding geopotential strongly oscillates at the poles.

Considering the special configuration of the GOCE mission, in order to stabilize the normal equations matrix, the Spherical Cap Regularization Approach (SCRA) has been developed. In this approach the geopotential function at the poles is predescribed by an analytical continuous function, which is defined solely in the spatially restricted polar regions. This function could either be based on an existing gravity field model or, alternatively, a low-degree gravity field solution which is adjusted from GOCE observations. Consequently the inversion process is stabilized.

The feasibility of the SCRA is evaluated based on a numerical closed-loop simulation, using a realistic GOCE mission scenario. Compared with standard methods such as Kaula and Tikhonov regularization, the SCRA shows a considerably improved performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albertella A., Sanso F. and Sneeuw N., 1999. Band-limited functions on a bounded spherical domain: the Slepian problem on the sphere. J. Geodesy, 73, 436–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albertella A., Migliaccio F. and Sanso F., 2001. Data gaps in finite dimensional boundary value problems for satellite gradiometry. J. Geodesy, 75, 641–646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouman J., 2000. Quality assessment of satellite-based global gravity field models. Publications on Geodesy, New Series, 48, Netherlands Geodetic Commission, Delft, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cesare S., 2002. Performance requirements and budgets for the gradiometric mission. Technical Note, GOC-TN-AI-0027, Alenia Spazio, Turin, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ditmar P., Kusche J. and Klees R., 2003: Computation of spherical harmonic coefficients from gravity gradiometry data to be acquired by the GOCE satellite: regularization issues. J. Geodesy, 77, 465–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ESA, 1999. Gravity Field and Steady-State Ocean Circulation Mission. Reports for Mission Selection, The Four Candidate Earth Explorer Core Missions, SP-1233(1), European Space Agency, Noordwijk, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golub G., Heath M. and Wahba G., 1979. Generalized cross-validation as a method for choosing a good ridge parameter. Technometrics, 21, 215–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han S.-C., Jekeli C. and Shum C. K., 2002. Efficient gravity field recovery using in situ disturbing potential observables from CHAMP. Geophys. Res. Lett., 29, Art.No. 1789.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen P., 1992. Analysis of discrete ill-posed problems by means of the L-curve. SIAM Review, 34, 561–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoerl A. and Kennard R., 1970. Ridge regression: biased estimation for nonorthogonal problems. Technometrics, 12, 55–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang C., 1991. Orthogonal functions over the oceans and applications to the determination of orbit error, geoid, sea surface topography from satellite altimetry. OSU Report, 414, Dept. of Geodetic Science and Surveying, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ivanov V., 1962. Integral equations of the first kind and an approximate solution for the inverse problem of potential. Soviet Math. Doklady, 3, 210–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaula W.M., 1966. Theory of Satellite Geodesy: Applications of Satellites to Geodesy. Dover Publications, Mineola, New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klees R., Bouman J., Koop R. and Visser P., 2000. Detailed Scientific Data Processing Approach: Technical Report on Regularization and Downward Continuation. ESA-Project “From Eotvos to mGal”, ESA/ESTEC Contract 13392/98/NL/GD, Final Report, WP 2, European Space Agency, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 72–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koch K.-R. and Kusche J., 2002. Regularization of geopotential determination from satellite data by variance components. J. Geodesy, 76, 259–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korte M. and Holme R., 2003. Regularization of spherical cap harmonics. Geophys. J. Int., 153, 253–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kusche J. and Klees R., 2002. Regularization of gravity field estimation from satellite gravity gradients. J. Geodesy, 76, 359–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lemoine F.G., Kenyon S.C., Factor J.K., Trimmer R.G., Pavlis N.K., Chinn D.S., Cox C.M., Klosko S.M., Luthcke S.B., Torrence M.H., Wang Y.M., Williamson R.G., Pavlis E.C., Rapp R.H. and Olson T.R., 1998. The Development of the Joint NASE GSFC and the National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) Geopotential Model EGM96. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerch F., Iz H. and Chan J., 1993. Gravity model solution based upon SLR data using eigenvalue analysis: Alternative methodology. In: D. Smith and D. Turcotte (Eds.), Contributions of Space Geodesy and Geodynamics-Earth Dynamics. Geodynamics Series, 24, American Geophysical Union, 213–219.

  • Meissl P., 1971. A study of covariance functions related to the Earth's disturbing potential. OSU Report, 151, Department of Geodetic Science, The Ohio State University, Columbus, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Metzler B. and Weimann F., 2003. WP Ia-4.4 Core Solver: Combined SST+SGG solution. GOCE DAPC Final Report, ASAP-CO-008/03, Graz University of Technology, Graz, Austria, 237–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Migliaccio F., Reguzzoni M. and Sanso F., 2004. Space wise approach to satellite gravity field determinations in the presence of coloured noise. J. Geodesy, 78, 304–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moritz H., 1980. Advanced Physical Geodesy. Herbert Wichmann Vlg., Karlsruhe, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morozov V., 1984. Methods for Solving Incorrectly Posed Problems. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pail R., 2002. In-orbit calibration and local gravity field continuation problem. ESA-Project “From Eotvos to mGal”, Final Report, ESA/ESTEC Contract 14287/00/NL/DC, WP 1, European Space Agency, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 9–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pail R., 2004. GOCE Quick-Look Gravity Field Analysis: Treatment of gravity gradients defined in the Gradiometer Reference Frame. Proc. Second International GOCE User Workshop, Frascati, March 2004, European Space Agency, Noordwijk, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pail R., Plank G. and Schuh W.-D., 2001. Spatially restricted data distribution on the sphere: the method of orthonormalized functions and applications. J. Geodesy, 75, 44–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pail R. and Plank G., 2002. Assessment of three numerical solution strategies for gravity field recovery from GOCE satellite gravity gradiometry implemented on a parallel platform. J. Geodesy, 76, 462–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pail R., Lackner B. and Preimesberger T., 2003. WP Ia-4.1 Quick-Look Gravity Field Analysis (QL-GFA). GOCE DAPC Final Report, ASAP-CO-008/03, Graz University of Technology, Graz, Austria, 107–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pail R. and Plank G., 2004. GOCE gravity field processing strategy. Stud. Geophys. Geod., 48, 289–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pail R. and Wermuth M., 2003. GOCE SGG and SST quick-look gravity field analysis. Advances in Geosciences, 1, 5–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preimesberger T. and Pail R., 2003. GOCE quick-look gravity solution: application of the semianalytic approach in the case of data gaps and nonrepeat orbits. Stud. Geophy. Geod., 47, 435–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapp R., Wang Y. and Pavlis N., 1991. The Ohio state 1991 geopotential and sea surface topography harmonic coefficient models. OSU Report, 410, Department of Geodetic Science and Surveying, The Ohio State University, Columbus, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rummel R., van Gelderen M., Koop R., Schrama E., Sanso F., Brovelli M., Miggliaccio F. and Sacerdote F., 1993. Spherical harmonic analysis of satellite gradiometry. Publications on Geodesy, 39, Neth. Geod. Comm., Delft, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rummel R., Gruber T. and Koop R., 2004. High level processing facility for GOCE: Products and processing strategy. Proc. Second International GOCE User Workshop, Frascati, March 2004, European Space Agency, Noordwijk, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuh W.-D., 1996. Tailored numerical solution strategies for the global determination of the Earth's gravity field. Mitteilungen geod. Inst. TU Graz, No. 81, Graz Univ. of Technology, Graz, Austria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smit J., Koop R., Visser P., van den Ijssel J., Sneeuw N., Miller J., Oberndorfer H., 2000. GOCE end to end performance analysis. ESTEC Contract No. 12735/98/NL/GD, European Space Agency, Noordwijk, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sneeuw N., 2002. A Semi-Analytical Approach to Gravity Field Analysis from Satellite Observations. Dissertation, DGK, Reihe C, Munich, 527 pp., Bayerische Akademie d. Wissenschaften, Munich, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sneeuw N. and Bun R., 1996. Global spherical harmonic computation by two-dimensional Fourier methods. J. Geodesy, 70, 224–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sneeuw N. and van Gelderen M., 1997. The polar gap. In: F. Sanso and R. Rummel (Eds), Geodetic Boundary Value Problems in View of the One Centimeter Geoid. Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences, 65, Springer, 559–568.

  • Tikhonov A., 1963. Regularization of incorrectly posed problems. Sov. Math. Dokl., 4, 1035–1038.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tikhonov A. and Arsenin V, 1977. Solutions of Ill-Posed Problems. Wiley and Sons, New York, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu P., 1992. Determination of surface gravity anomalies using gradiometric observables. Geophys. J. Int., 110, 321–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Navigation and Satellite Geodesy, Graz University of Technology, Steyrergasse 30, 8010, Graz, Austria

    B. Metzler & R. Pail

Authors
  1. B. Metzler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. Pail
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Metzler, B., Pail, R. GOCE Data Processing: The Spherical Cap Regularization Approach. Stud Geophys Geod 49, 441–462 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11200-005-0021-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11200-005-0021-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation